Camunda has streamlined our automation processes, particularly in decision-making and BPMN modeling, reducing manual intervention.

The platform's approach to BPMN modeling is straightforward and versatile, making it easy to adopt and use effectively.

I've been using Camunda for about three to four months.

We haven't encountered any software bugs so far in terms of product stability.

The platform is capable of scaling from small to complex applications.

We previously used Bizagi but switched to Camunda due to its superior BPMN and DMN modeling capabilities and better integration with other applications.

Initially, installation was challenging, but recent improvements have made it much easier. Following the Camunda website's instructions, we completed the setup in less than an hour.

We implemented the platform in-house without involving third parties, but we're considering future integrated applications with external software like UiPath and chatbots.

The product's robust toolset and integration for BPMN and DMN modeling makes it a worthwhile investment for our organization.

The product integration between BPMN and DMN is a standout feature. It eliminates the need for additional software and simplifies decision tool development.

We use the product to automate our workflows. It is used for task management.

Camunda is a good product. The product has a good task management engine. Camunda has had a good impact on our operational efficiency. The integrations are getting better. It has a lot of REST APIs. We can integrate the tool via REST. It is a good feature. It's much better than what it used to be.

Camunda is Java-based. It would be better if the tool were made less reliant on Java.

I have been using the solution for four to five years.

The solution is very stable. I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is very scalable. I rate the scalability an eight and a half out of ten. We have more than 100 users. I use the product twice a week.

We have used Flowable. We also used an IBM product, but it was not very good. We chose Camunda because it is more scalable. It has a smaller footprint. It is the most effective product.

The initial setup is easy. I rate the ease of setup a nine out of ten. The solution has multiple deployment options. It has its own cloud services. The deployment takes just a few hours.

We deploy the tool in-house. We've embedded it within our application. We need only one person for the deployment.

We use the free version.

The number of people required to maintain the tool depends on the application in which it is embedded. We might not need many people for maintenance. Our in-house team resolves all our issues, so we do not have to contact support. There is a lot of documentation available. They are very good. The solution has BPMN and DMN. DMN is very powerful when modeling business decisions. The rules engine is very good. I will recommend it for the rules engine. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

I use it for designing my BPMN models for my company processes, but I don't use Camunda in-depth.

So, the Camunda Modeler is a free version of Camunda. It's just one small part of it.

It has great value in terms of automation. We can automate processes.

Another great thing is Camunda Cockpit. The interface is great.

It would be great to have the ability to display more than one process collaboration in the same view.

Ideally, we could collapse and expand each process within that view, clearly visualizing two different processes collaborating through messages.

I have been using it for a couple of years. I use version eight (v8).

It is a stable product. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable product. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

I didn't need the techincal support. I haven't needed to for Modeler. It's simple.

But if I were to use their automation engine, I'm sure I would need support.

Camunda was my first option.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy. It is pretty straightforward.

We use Camunda on the cloud. Camunda provides the cloud.

It is east to use.

We didn't have to deploy anything. We just opened an account, signed up, and that was it.

It's costly and not accessible for small enterprises or startups. It would be great if Camunda offered a tier plan for smaller companies. I wouldn't recommend the paid version for small projects.

Camunda automation engine is quite complex and technical. It requires technical knowledge, and I don't think anyone can start by themselves.

However, Camunda Modeler is different and doesn't require technical knowledge.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use it in telecom service management to automate and orchestrate our service order flows.

There is DMN (Decision Model and Notation) on the flows, but it depends on how the user interprets the question. If it's purely decision-making, then not really. It's a feature of the platform we use but not the main one.

The main feature is the BPMN orchestration workflow engine.

We had to look for a replacement because our old tool didn't evolve anymore. Camunda is a further evolution or branch of activity. There are certain branches of workflow engine tools, and Camunda seems to have a lot of traction, maturity, and stability. It also matches the need for agile development.

In terms of efficiency and execution, we're satisfied. In terms of design, you still need to create the design and give it to someone else, but the graphical user interface is fine.

The fact that it's open source is interesting. My colleagues like the support, even the free or basic support. We now have enterprise support, but they were quite satisfied with the basic one.

The main feature is BPMN, in its totality. You have the design, editor, monitoring, execution, scaling, and deployment. So, it's the total package that they're quite happy with.

Probably one area I look forward to has to do with AI and how Camunda sees the AI angle on workflow. I know they're working on that or at least communicating about it. They already have versions to run on the cloud, so they've tackled that. We're looking at what they will come up with otherwise.

As long as the product gets enough traction and evolves, we're happy. With open source, you can monitor what's happening. If the product is being left by many customers, that's a sign. We're also users of Camunda, and you can watch one of our guides' presentations in the States about one of our implementations.

Our focus now is on developing service management and DMN APIs for the platform. AI is something we take into consideration, but we'll see what additional benefits it could bring and how to interconnect it with our data or AI engineering.

I have been using it for three years. I use the latest version.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. No major things to worry about.

I would rate the scalability as eight out of ten, and it could be improved. I am not 100% sure of its scalability capabilities. We haven't done enough volumes on it.

The system is primarily for automated flows. Maybe there are 20 or 25 people who use the production version as a user. It's not really a system with a lot of manual stuff. For us, I would assume the usage is rather limited at this stage.

It is used in production every day. We plan to increase the use of Camunda in the future.

We now have an enterprise contract because of the increasing volume in production. We want to ensure we have good enough SLAs, so we probably bought the enterprise support.

We had plenty of workflow engines in that domain. The company used Oracle BPEL, a workflow product that was originally open source but was bought by Oracle a long time ago and then became a paid license product.

Other products in different domains:

We've got SAP HR modules and logistics modules, and we've migrated a few to SAP HANA, but I'm not the best reference for that domain.

In our multiple domains, we have a mix of commercial and technical platforms. We use Camunda for custom development, and ClickSoftware for field work management, which we're migrating to IFS.

For the setup, I'd probably rate it a nine out of ten. I'm not personally involved, but it's quite easy.

• Deployment resources: It's probably only one or two people who were busy installing the product. I don't think it's a huge problem or challenge.

• Integration aspect: There was a bit of a challenge, but it was resolved by redesigning an activity in the process flow. It wasn't a huge problem, but the people had to figure out how to use existing mechanisms to solve it.
• We can resolve the challenges that might arise in Camunda using the features on the platform. It might not be immediately out of the box, but we can find a setup or pattern that brings us the solution. We can extend the framework. I haven't really seen blocking factors at this stage, and I know of other companies that use it, so it looks alright.

• For the maintenance part, I assume it's quite a small team.

It's a license for support. So, it's not too expensive, in my opinion.

Development teams use open source components, do a small check on different tools, and then go for one. I don't think there was a specific RFP (request for proposal) process involved, but I'm pretty sure they looked at the market. They looked at other workflow engines like Activity in previous projects.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten.

My advice:

New buyers should definitely look at this option. It's a good option as the product is technically sound. There are quite a few customers running on the platform and good reference customers. There is a community forum, and the documentation is readily available. So, if you are investigating options, it should definitely be on your list, if not at the number one spot.

Recent trends around workflow automation:

We see a lot of cloud SaaS solutions coming up with their own workflow platforms. For example, SAP or Salesforce also come with workflow systems. You need to consider that these platforms have embedded options where you have no choice but to use them. But if you have spots where you do your own development or there is a package that uses Camunda, the interesting part will be what steps they provide to work with the data and AI to make the solution even more attractive.

We used the solution in quite a simple manner. We were disappointed that the dictionary was missing. The hierarchy could not be shown, defined, or structured the way we like. We did not use all the features. I have used BPMN Modeler.

Camunda is really useful. That is why my colleagues and I use it in the company. The solution is useful for small projects.

The product does not have a dictionary. The tool must enable users to build or design sub-processes. It must provide a more convenient and easy way to define sub-processes.

I have been using the solution for five years.

The tool is always stable. We have no troubles. I rate the stability an eight to nine out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a five out of ten. We have ten users. The product is used once or twice a week.

I rate the ease of setup seven to eight out of ten.

We use a community version.

All the business process management tools are quite similar. We have to get used to each application's individual ideas, thoughts, and intentions. We use BIC for our organization and Camunda for the projects. It is easier to use Camunda for small projects. Signavio is also a competitor.

It's not possible for us to define a process as deep as it is necessary to automate it. We tested but did not use DMN capabilities. I will recommend the solution to others. I just finished studying business process management. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

As a service company, we implement this product for different customers. It's quite useful in automating processes, particularly with its orchestration capabilities.

The visibility – the diagrams you create – and then being able to automate based on them are valuable features. It's easy to explain and comprehend, and the integration aspects are valuable.

Typically, the user integrates with the business applications by calling jobs using REST APIs and similar methods. When the user needs connectors to databases for fetching data – that's where it's useful. Also, until the previous version, the user could embed Camunda within other applications. That was a good feature.

The user interface is good from the development point of view. But it's not a no-code, low-code kind of thing. From a developer's perspective, it works well.

So, it might not be easy for non-technical people to use. Camunda themselves never positioned it as a tool primarily for business users. Business users could use it for the designing perspective and then hand it over to the developers.

In the latest version, there are certain workflow nodes that are missing. Camunda should bring those back, or rather, develop them quickly. We've seen some of this on their roadmap, so they're working on it.

I have been familiar with this product for five years.

Whatever issues we've faced, we were able to resolve on our own, so it's been good enough for us.

The open-source aspect was important to us. So Camunda has been a good fit.

We work with both the free version and the latest paid version, as well as version 7.4.

The pricing has been flexible. Overall, it's been good.

If a company has workflow automation requirements or needs orchestration, it's quite useful.

Overall, it's good and solid. At least up to version seven, which we're heavily using. Version eight is progressing, and Camunda will continue to add the things we need. I would rate it at least a nine out of ten.

I worked on a project in Pakistan. For this project, I replicated processes on Camunda, including BPDs (Business Process Diagrams) and activities. Currently, I am working on the forms aspect of the implementation.

I appreciate Camunda's strong SLA agreement, my current bank client required customized forms. Camunda forms are built on Angular, and I'm currently involved in a headless reporting project with Camunda.

Camunda's front end is built in Angular, while I'm integrating the Java backend services. I'll consume the Java services and handle integration with Angular on the front end.

When deploying Camunda, I prefer a headless approach. This means Camunda acts as middleware while the front end is built using a different technology. And back end will be from the different technology.

I've integrated a database with Camunda's process engine. This allows me to generate emails and update the database as needed.

It is very user-friendly compared to IBM BPM. It's much simpler because it doesn't have the process admin and process inspector roles and separate pages – it's more streamlined. That means even non-technical departments can use it.

If we don't need complex, high-level workflows but just a small form-based process, Camunda can be used by any type of client – technical or non-technical.

I don't see a lot that needs improvement in the core functionality. With the on-premises version, the task list has issues, and user creation is not as straightforward as in IBM BPM with its Process Admin role.

Camunda also lacks some of the initial documentation that helps with onboarding. I often rely on Udemy courses for help.

So, basically, on-premises user management needs improvement.

I'd recommend a feature like the Process Inspector that IBM BPM offers. This is where you can troubleshoot and manage running processes. It would be very helpful for non-technical users, as sometimes they need insight into where a process is stuck.

Camunda Cockpit has similar functionality, but it's a bit more complex. I'm a technical person, so I understand it, but our clients are often from non-technical backgrounds. My clients are mostly common users from commerce backgrounds.

So it would be better for Camunda to be able to easily view their processes and troubleshoot process instances.

The Process Portal in IBM BPM is basically a dashboard view. If Camunda could offer a similar dashboard for users, it would be a big benefit for their organizations.

I have been using it for six months. I use version eight.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten.

I would rate the scalability a five out of ten. Scalability would be improved with better documentation and resources. IBM BPM, for instance, offers extensive documentation and support teams for various issues. Camunda's documentation feels less comprehensive in comparison.

Additionally, it would be helpful to have more readily available use cases on the internet. This is important for doing POCs [Proofs of Concept] and showcasing how Camunda can be used. IBM BPM has many example use cases for systems like currency exchange or HR management.

Camunda lacks this, often showing only very small processes that can be difficult for clients to envision within their own needs.

So, the lack of readily available use cases affects the ability of Camunda to adapt to your customer's needs.

I have experience with both IBM developer tools and Camunda.

Due to cost considerations, we often recommend Camunda to smaller clients where IBM solutions might be too expensive in Pakistan, especially for small companies.

I also do POCs [Proofs of Concept]. The demands I receive from customers are varied, but they want to move forward with the technology. If Camunda fulfills their requirements, they will definitely adopt it. Before Camunda, I also worked on Appian, but it wasn't as exciting as Camunda.

I'm doing a Master's in Data Science, so I know how crucial decision-making is for customers. Once my first POC is done, I'll definitely explore decision modeling. Camunda is still in its early stages in Pakistan.

There aren't as many resources in Pakistan as there should be.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a nine out of ten, with ten being easy. Installing Camunda on your machine is incredibly easy. It's even easier than installing MS Office. I also installed IBM BPM on a virtual machine, and that took me one or two weeks to configure fully. Camunda is much simpler in comparison – the process is similar to installing MS Office.

Most customers I have are in the banking sector, so they prefer on-premises deployment.

It takes around three days to deploy the solution because it includes things like permissions etc. Camunda is significantly quicker to deploy in comparison to IBM BPM, which takes around ten days.

I'm a developer, not an administrator. So, I usually work with the administration team for the actual deployment. Typically, we need a few key files: one for the setup and one for the Camunda server itself. I'm familiar with the server file since I have Camunda installed for development on my own computer.

Compared to IBM BPM or Appian, Camunda's pricing is good.

Camunda is significantly cheaper than IBM BPM, especially considering the SLA agreement. Of the three products, it offers the best price-to-value ratio.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I'd recommend it if you're currently paying a high annual fee for a solution like IBM BPM. Camunda is much more affordable while still offering a strong SLA agreement and security.

It's worth trying – perhaps initially with a smaller process in your organization. You could even test it on a UAT environment before going live. I often recommend this approach to clients, as it's a good solution for many use cases.

I use the solution in my company for process modeling and collaborations with other users.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the area revolving around process modeling. It is possible to take care of the process modeling with BPMN. I think the most beneficial feature of the product is that the tool serves as a process orchestration platform and also helps in the area of process automation.

Camunda should be able to automate the processes in any department, like the ones in HR that are related to procurement or any others, which are repeated in the same manner without any significant changes in the process, as it is one area where the product faces certain shortcomings.

I have been using Camunda for about three years. I am a customer of Camunda.

It is a stable solution. I have not faced any trouble when using the product in my company.

Camunda is a scalable product.

Around 10 to 15 people in my company use the product.

I have never contacted the solution's technical support.

The product's initial setup phase is difficult for beginners.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

The product's price depends on the number of processes that need to be automated or where the orchestration part needs to be used. The product is affordable for medium and large enterprises.

My company chose Camunda since we wanted a tool for process modeling with BPMN so that we could automate some of our processes.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it, as it is a simple and practical tool with powerful capabilities.

The product helps achieve operational efficiency in our company since it helps with the process modeling area. The product also helps automate and orchestrate processes effectively.

Camunda's user interface's contribution to process modeling and deployment stems from the fact that it is pretty intuitive and simple.

It is easy for someone to learn to use Camunda.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

We use the product to automate business processes for our clients.

Camunda's most valuable feature is its ability to integrate with different products.

They could provide more documentation regarding the integration of different programming languages. We encounter challenges finding recommendations or online documents while developing processes.

We have been using Camunda for more than five years.

I rate the platform's stability a nine out of ten.

The platform is more suitable for medium companies. Enterprises might need more automated and customizable solutions. I rate Camunda's scalability a nine out of ten.

We encounter challenges in finding examples for particular programming languages. Apart from that, the technical support documentation is good.

The setup process is easy. It was the primary reason to opt for Camunda.

The product is expensive for a small or medium-sized company. I rate the pricing a two or three out of ten.

Setting up or translating business processes using the Camunda platform is easy. It provides flexibility for integrating with different third-party systems. We have implemented the product to optimize internal business processes and improve API communication between different units.

I rate it an eight out of ten.